<![CDATA[Artificial intelligence (AI) has shifted from peripheral automation to a constructive force in curriculum and pedagogy, requiring education systems to reconsider not only instructional tools but also educational purposes. This study positions curriculum design as the central arena where AI’s transformative potential and ethical risks are negotiated. Grounded in constructivism, connectivism, and the TPACK framework, it proposes a pedagogy-first and values-led model for AI integration that connects skill development, governance, and equity. The study aims to conceptualise AI-aware curriculum design by integrating pedagogical theory, equity considerations, and governance frameworks, while also examining the empirical applicability of the proposed framework among curriculum stakeholders. A descriptive quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted with 100 school teachers and curriculum stakeholders from ten reputed government schools in Bihar, India. Data were collected using a structured five-point Likert-scale questionnaire covering eight interrelated constructs, including AI curriculum readiness, teacher competency, assessment redesign, ethical governance awareness, and institutional support. The data were analysed using SPSS 26. The findings indicate moderate but uneven readiness for AI integration. Assessment Redesign Readiness showed the strongest correlation with AI Curriculum Readiness (r = .71), suggesting that evaluative reform is a key mechanism for meaningful integration. Teachers’ AI Competency was strongly associated with Ethical Governance Awareness (r = .65), highlighting the connection between technical fluency and ethical judgment. Limited access to professional development (M = 2.97) revealed systemic instability. The study identifies five operational principles: purposeful competency framing, pedagogy-first integration, teacher-centred professional learning, ethical transparency, and equity-oriented governance. It concludes that sustainable AI integration depends less on technological advancement than on coherent, human-centred curricular architecture.]]>
